Non-believing clergy: Now what shall we do?

Funny thing. After reading this article my faith has been seriously shaken; but after looking at Mr. Dennet I think I now believe in Santa Claus.

Prof. Dennett at the top criticizes the commenters for not having absorbed the stories of the responding clergy members. But it seems the major downside effect of confessing one's lack of faith and leaving one's congregation is unemployment. I don't notice any great concern about a mental crisis beought on by loss of faith. If unemployment is the main issue, why are these clergypeople any more worthy of my attention, consideration and sympathy than the millions of other unemployed in this country, some of them out of work for years and hopeless. It's not as if the scientific discoveries that have eaten away at religious belief are a new phenomenon; they've been happening regularly since the 18th century and only getting stronger all the time. In my view, anyone who a generation or two ago, when training in a seminary, ignored the strong evidence then against religious dogma was putting her/his head in the sand, and her/his predicament now doesn't interest or move me. Nowhere near as much as, for example, the predicament of a print newspaper reporter made obsolete by the internet (and perhaps leaving the nation without decent in-depth reporting), or a skilled American worker whose job has been exported to China. These clergy, after all, walked into this with their eyes open. Or with eyes that should have been open.

Well, golly, why not make religion - or at least, religious practice - scientific. It's, after all, the only way religion will regain its former respect, and be able to stand up to the mocking atheists. How, you ask? Well, I'll tell you. The scientific laboratory of religion is prayer and meditation. The proof of religion is direct, personal experience. The master scientists are the saints - not the inactive theorists who try to cling to a purely mental "faith." Religion is always and purely of the heart, where it can be experienced. Lacking a strong tradition of experience, we may need to borrow from cultures that _have_ made religion nonsectarian and scientific. Among the best guides that I know to practicing religion scientifically is the highly intelligent, American-born Swami Kriyananda - see, e.g., his book, "Awaken to Superconsciousness." The time for knowing God has come - no more blind faith, dogma, and doubt.

This explains a lot of vapid preaching that's out there. While people of faith come to be fed spiritually and connect with the fellowship of other believers, they're stuck with a phony in the pulpit. It also explains a lot of adulterous and lewd behaviour on the part of the pretenders who prey on emotinally vulnerable members (who mistakenly trust them).

It's normal for faith to wax and wane; we call this growth. We can never answer questions if we don't ask them first. But Christians rely on scripture and the guidance of God's Spirit to lead, guide, and ultimately come to a place of renewed and strengthened faith. If you simply throw the source away, of course you will come to different conclusions. But no one is ever sorry to have their faith renewed and restored, because "without faith it is impossible to please God". I say good ridence to the conterfeits who cozen congregants out of their tithes and offerings. I also imagine that churches with the most politally correct bent will be duped into hiring these cheaters in the first place.

'By his account, upon having been told by friends and relatives that they had prayed for him, he resisted the urge to ask them, "Did you also sacrifice a goat?"'
_____________

On the other hand, we'd have to say that with or without the goat, their hearts were in the right place :^)

"Dennett lives with his wife in North Andover, Massachusetts, and has a daughter, a son, and two grandsons.[13] He is also an avid sailor.

In October 2006, Dennett was hospitalized due to an aortic dissection. After a nine-hour surgery, he was given a new aorta. In an essay posted on the Edge website, Dennett gives his firsthand account of his health problems, his consequent feelings of gratitude towards the scientists and doctors whose hard work made his recovery possible, and his complete lack of a "deathbed conversion". By his account, upon having been told by friends and relatives that they had prayed for him, he resisted the urge to ask them, "Did you also sacrifice a goat?"[14][15]

ref: answers.com

My father-in-law, now deceased, was a non-believing Baptist minister for many years. I have seen how his life unfolded under this difficult circumstance. He published a book of essays at the end of his life that contains his observations.
He continued as a minister for all the reasons that your study participants did. It led to a deep cynicism about religion and a sense of alienation. Interestingly enough, he reconnected at the end of his life with his grateful church members, who had appreciated his leadership 40 years ago. Many of them came to his funeral.
Like many of your participants, he had a graduate degree in theology and was a very intelligent man. His own thought processes led to this

'those who left juchristianity to atheism failed in the same trap of the *human self*the human self became their own god!'

More Muslim propaganda and not from around here, I'd guess. Keep it coming - religion will be it's own undoing.

the spell of atheism is not less not more than the spell of juchristianity ,althou juchristianity is a monotheist religion but juchristianity up to this minute of history not sure about who the god is ,is he jesus or mary or the father or the trinity or the incarnation?in the absence of the god how would people fullfill the due duty to the god?

those who left juchristianity to atheism failed in the same trap of the *human self*the human self became their own god!

the back ground of hitler is the same back ground of george bush their background is juchristianity ,while their motivation is their own atheism .

mankind is not mannered by divine revelation he or she is automaticaly mannered by his self humanity atheism.

mankind is on the relgion of his creator the god until his parents or the enviroment make a jew or a christian or a pagan or atheist out of him/her.

again and again and again the western cultur (juchristianity+human secularism)is primitve and backward both think tanks are rusty and hole/y.

4.
"There may have been a time when even parties founded on the ecclesiastical basis were a necessity. (Between World War I & II, the Catholic "Center Party" had been one of the most powerful political parties in Germany.) At that time Liberalism was opposed to the Church, while Marxism was anti-religious. But that time is past. National Socialism neither opposes the church, nor is it anti-religious, but on the contrary, it stands on the ground of a real Christianity."
"The Church's interests cannot fail to coincide with ours alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of to-day, in our fight against the Bolshevist culture, against an atheistic movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for the consciousness of a community in our national life, for the conquest of hatred and disunion between the classes, for the conquest of civil war and unrest, of strife and discord. These are not anti-Christian, these are Christian principles."
Adolf Hitler, in a speech delivered at Koblenz, August 26, 1934.
" I believe today that I am acting in the sense of the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews, I am fighting for the Lord's work."
Adolf Hitler, Reichstag Speech, 1936
"And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary, He drove those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God."
Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp.174
"Providence has caused me to be Catholic, and I know therefore how to handle this Church."
Adolf Hitler, reported to have said in Berlin in 1936, on the enmity of the Catholic Church to National Socialism."
Impressed with the organization of the Papacy, Hitler is quoted as saying the following: "I learned much from the Order of the Jesuits…until now there has never been anything more grandiose on the earth than the hierarchical organization of the Catholic Church. I transferred much of this organization into my own party."
Hermann Rauschning, Hitler Said To Me (1939), 266-267.
"I believe that it was God’s will to send a youth from here into the Reich, to let him grow up, to raise him to be the leader of the nation so as to enable him to lead back his homeland into the Reich….In three days the Lord has smitten them… And to me the grace was given on the day of the betrayal to be able to unite my homeland [Austria] with the Reich….I would now give thanks to Him who let me return to my homeland in order than I might now lead it into my German Reich. Tomorrow, may every German recognize the hour, and measure its import and bow in humility before the Almighty who in a few weeks has wrought a miracle upon us. [Closing speech of the campaign at Vienna, 9 April 1938]"

All the previous are good christer morals and ethics, incorporated by the christer Hitler himself into his nazi ideology. Truth is what it is.

And a liar is what he is.

3.
"The fact that the Vatican is concluding a treaty with the new Germany means the acknowledgement of the National Socialist state by the Catholic Church. This treaty shows the whole world clearly and unequivocally that the assertion that National Socialism [Nazism] is hostile to religion is a lie." Adolf Hitler, 22 July 1933, writing to the Nazi Party (quoted in John Cornwell's "Hitler's Pope" )
A few days after the signing of the Lateran Treaty, Hitler wrote an article for the Volkischer Reobachter, published on February 22, 1929, warmly welcoming the agreement. "The fact that the Curia is now making its peace with Fascism," he wrote, "shows that the Vatican trusts the new political realities far more than did the former liberal democracy with which it could not come to terms." Turning to the German situation, he rebuked the Center Party leadership for its recalcitrant attachment to democratic politics. "By trying to preach that democracy is still in the best interests of German Catholics, the Center Party ... is placing itself in stark contradiction to the spirit of the treaty signed today by the Holy See."
"The fact that the Catholic Church has come to an agreement with Fascist Italy." he went on, "... Proves beyond doubt that the Fascist world of ideas is closer to Christianity y than those of Jewish liberalism or even atheistic Marxism, to which the so-called Catholic Center Party sees itself so closely bound, to the detriment of Christianity today and our German people."
"While we destroyed the (Catholic) Centre Party, we have not only brought thousands of priests back into the Church, but to millions of respectable people we have restored their faith in their religion and in their priests. The union of the Evangelical Church in a single Church for the whole Reich, the Concordat with the Catholic Church, these are but milestones on the road which leads to the establishment of a useful relation and a useful co-operation between the Reich and the two Confessions." Adolf Hitler, in his New Year Message on 1 Jan. 1934
"I know that here and there the objection has been raised: Yes, but you have deserted Christianity. No, it is not that we have deserted Christianity; it is those who came before us who deserted Christianity. We have only carried through a clear division between politics, which have to do with terrestrial things, and religion, which must concern itself with the celestial sphere. There has been no interference with the doctrine of the Confessions or with their religious freedom, nor will there be any such interference. On the contrary the State protects religion, though always on the one condition that religion will not be used as a cover for political ends.

2.
"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator." Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 46
"What we have to fight for. . . is the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may be enabled to fulfill the mission assigned to it by the Creator." [Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp. 125]
"This human world of ours would be inconceivable without the practical existence of a religious belief."
[Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, pp.152]

early Feb. of 1933, he declared in the Reichstag (parliament) that the churches were to be an integral part of German national life.' " . . .

"The National Government will preserve and defend those basic principles on which our nation has been built up. It regards Christianity as the foundation of our national morality and the family as the basis of national life."
"The National Government regards the two Christian confessions as factors essential to the soul of the German people. It will respect the contracts they have made with the various regions. It declares its determination to leave their rights intact. In the schools, the government will protect the rightful influence of the Christian bodies. We hold the spiritual forces of Christianity to be indispensable elements in the moral uplift of most of the German people. We hope to develop friendly relations with the Holy See" ( addressed the Reichstag on March 23, 1933)
"The Government of the Reich regards Christianity as the unshakable foundation of the morals and moral code of the nation." "The rights of the churches will not be diminished." ( from The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1, pg. 369-372 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942 - edition of 1969.)
"As we see in Christianity the unshakable foundation of moral life, so it is our duty to continue to cultivate friendly relations with the Holy See and to develop them."
(from Hitler's speech to the Reichstag on March 23rd, 1933, in which he indicated the programme of his Government. See Universe, March 31st, 1933.)
"National Socialism, he proclaimed, has always affirmed that it is determined to take the Christian Churches under the protection of the State. For their part the churches cannot for a second doubt that they need the protection of the State, and that only through the State can they be enabled to fulfill their religious mission. Indeed, the churches demand this protection from the State." [Hitler - in his first radio address to the German people after coming to power (1933).]

JVORAN:

I like the word christer. It is very descriptive. I will use it.

When I see a liar, I will call him a liar.

And here is more proof that Hitler was, indeed, a christer -- in his own words:

1.
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who - God's truth! - was greatest, not as a sufferer, but as a fighter."
"In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was his fight against the Jewish poison.
"Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross."
"As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice . And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly, it is the distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people. And when I look on my people I see them work and work and toil and labor, and at the end of the week they have only for their wages wretchedness and misery.
“When I go out in the morning and see these men standing in their queues and look into their pinched faces, then I believe I would be no Christian, but a very devil, if I felt no pity for them, if I did not, as did our Lord two thousand years ago, turn against those by whom today this poor people are plundered and exploited."

I think what disappoints me most as an agnostic observer of "On Faith" discussions is the serious lack of civility and respect for other viewpoints and opinions. The use of pejorative appellations such as "christers" and the calling of people "liars". This demeans and makes irrelevant any discussion that can inform, inspire, or provide any meaningful input to the whole issue of belief, non-belief, and search for belief -- or not.

Admittedly, my last link included the christian apologist viewpoint - which disclaims any direct connection with Hitler and Christianity....many sources differ with this view and there is substantial evidence that Hitler supported what was known as 'Positive Christianity' or the aryan purist/supremicist view of Jesus and his religion.........

If we need to conjure up the religious views held by the KKK, other modern Nazi affiliates here and abroad, and assorted local racist brownshirt organizations, that can very easily be done.

http://www.search.com/reference/Positive_Christianity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_religious_beliefs

For 5AMEFA91 - apparently a christian who seems to be a real stickler for the facts when it comes to Nazis and religion!

Doesn't like Wikipedia - as though another source is going to reach a different conclusion....and indeed, they don't.

http://www.adherents.com/people/ph/Adolf_Hitler.html

Something else preachers, pastors, imams, prophets/"profits", priests and monks need to consider:

All followers of religion are actually "Mythians" considering the mythical foundations of the major religions i.e. there was no Abraham, no Moses, no Noah, no Easter, no virgin birth, no Moroni and no Gabriel and therefore no angelic revelations to Joe Smith, Mary or Mohammed.

DanielTheHomocidalFakeAtheistLiar:

"Nazi Germany was far more atheistic than Christian."

Another blatant example of DanielTheHomicidalFakeAtheistLiar's willingness to lie to support his delusions. He has no more respect for truth than he has for history. And he recently posted his willingness to shoot atheists.

The fact is that the majority of the Nazi hierarchy, and the vast bulk of the German population under the Nazis, were christers--and of these, most were roman catholic.

One can begin with Hitler himself who never left the roman catholic church, and, until his death, faithfully paid his state church taxes.

In fact, Hitler was adamantly opposed to atheism.

In addition to Adolf Hitler, were Josef Goebbels, Heinrich Himmler, Reinhard Heydrich, and Rudolf Hoess, (commandant of Auschwitz I, not to be confused with Hitler's Deputy Fuëhrer and secretary, Rudolf Hess). Hermann Goering, on the other hand, had mixed Catholic - Protestant parentage, while Rudolf Hess, Martin Bormann, Albert Speer, and Adolf Eichmann had Protestant backgrounds. Not one of the top Nazi leaders was raised in a liberal or atheistic family.

No matter how immorally the many prominent Catholic leaders of the Third Reich acted their standing as "good Catholics" was never publicly challenged by their church's leaders until defeat or death had denied these Nazi Catholics the power to do much harm.

DanielTheHomocidalFakeAtheistLiar can't find a publisher for his revisionist garbage "essays". I wonder why. Clearly his inability to write is not the only factor.

I personally know a church organist who is a dedicated atheist. I'm sure many people involved in church activities at all levels are non-believers. For the clergy not to reform is what is hypocritical. Honesty should be the core value of commentaries on the relevance of belief in secular humanism or religious dogma. These clergy and "people of faith" who are honestly questioning their entire belief systems and religious teachings should be praised for their openness and honesty. The opposite of Jim Jones leading his "flock" into a suicide cult, I would love to see these "doubting Thomas's" lead their followers on their same quest to the fundamental truths of non-belief in church dogma and supernatural deities. Somewhere in that 28 page study it was said that there are plenty of paid, professional clergy, but no paid atheists. I'd like to see institutions started that would pay atheists to "preach" the truth about science, the scientific method and the certainty and serenity of solid beliefs in substantiated reality. Let's exchange Sunday school indoctrination with early scientific learning, maybe based on children's near universal interest in dinosaurs and extinct ice age mammals. By learning of the geological epochs, radiocarbon and other dating methods, extinction events and the flowering of life based on evolution, these enlightened children will have the necessary knowledge to see where ethics, morality and altruism actually arose from, deep in the antiquity of animal evolution - not in religious trappings and myth! THAT would be honesty in education. The hypocrisy arises when "faith" clouds all aspects of reality and poisons youthful inquisitiveness with brainwashing and false belief systems. Base your teachings on science and rationality, not fairy tales and the supernatural. Please see www.edge.org to see what the truly enlightened are saying about atheism and reality!

Dr. Dennett,

As many have pointed out: religion, whatever the truth value of its various claims may be (and obviously they cannot all be true, even if any of them can), has been an integral part of human societies since time immemorial. It seems entirely plausible, as David Sloan Wilson and others have suggested, that religion is itself an evolutionary adaptation, a social instinct that provides a solid foundation for group-level cohesion and altruism: for each individual, the costs of the demands and sacrifices of religion are outweighed by the tendency of a strongly religious community to function as a highly effective unit in competition with other groups.

I'm an Godless heathen myself, but I wonder: if religiosity is a trait (a "Good Trick", as you might say) that has been selected for throughout human history, might it not be the case that secularism itself is maladaptive? Look, for example, at Europe: the educated, secular elites are reproducing at below-replacement levels, while birthrates amongst Muslim immigrants are very high indeed.

The radical skepticism of secular, Darwinian philosophy is, as you yourself have said, a "universal acid" that tends to dissolve away ancient ethical and metaphysical absolutes. This fosters a culture of doubt; a community pacified and etiolated by a hesitancy to judge, and therefore to act. Strongly religious groups, on the other hand, are largely untroubled by such doubt (and the radical introspection it leads to), and enjoy the robustly bracing effect of a steady confidence that they are guided and favored by God.

So: from a purely Darwinian perspective, doesn't it begin to look as if secularism is the path to extinction? Was Pascal right in saying that we ought to "fake it till we make it"?

What are your thoughts about this?

Thanks,
Malcolm Pollack

"Let's suppose that Martin Marty and Marcus Borg and John Shelby Spong are always utterly forthright when they hold forth in churches,..."

Maybe they should stop taking the paychecks if they don't believe in the religions that are paying them. Pretty simple. Get a real job if you have any skills that people will pay for. Otherwise go live on your inheritance.

Persiflage:

"And more specifically, this detailed synopsis shouldn't be overlooked ..."

Wikipedia?! You know, Wikipedia is pretty good on math and statistics, and ok on physics and chemistry. As for the rest, there is a reason why universities forbid students to site that garbage pile. On things controversial it has no balance an no mechanism to find one. Mostly cracked pots on rants. Get a better source. Please.

Toxic Catholic SSchaum:

Another blatant example of Toxic Catholic SSchaum's willingness to lie to support his delusions. He has no more respect for truth than he has for history. You know whereof you speak.

HAHAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAH

DanielTheHomocidalLiar:

Did you find a publisher today?

Daniel22:

"If Nazi Germany was not an atheistic phenomenon"

It wasn't. The country was largely Christian. Just like the US is and was largely Christian.

Daniel22:
"did not believe in the biology of race, did not believe in a thousand year reich, and was rather Christian"

LOL.

As if someone being "rather Christian" automatically precludes one from also disbelieving in the biology of race, belief in a thousand year reich!

Please stop with your logical fallacies!

Daniel22:
", then I do not want to hear Nietzsche associated with Nazi Germany ever again."

What you want or do not want is irrelevant.

The fact is that Hitler's Germany was largely Christian. That it was responsible for the persecution of Jews is fact as well.

Whether you like it or not is a different matter. No matter how much you want Nazi Germany to not be Christian, it was.

Here, feast your eyes on this:
http://nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm

for Hitler's Christianity and

http://nobeliefs.com/ChurchesWWII.htm

for Europe's part in the Holocaust

Hitler was avowedly anti-atheist .... a particular view that he equated with Russia and communism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_religious_beliefs

And more specifically, this detailed synopsis shouldn't be overlooked ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_aspects_of_Nazism

D12 sums up Nazism:

'Far more explicable as an atheistic phenomenon.'
_________________

Not hardly - the one thing you won't find any mention of in the link below is atheism.

A little googling can go a long way....unless you already know the answers of course.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany

"Nazi Germany was far more atheistic than Christian."

Another blatant example of DanielTheLiar's willingness to lie to support his delusions. He has no more respect for truth than he has for history.

DanielTheLiar can't find a publisher for his garbage "essays". I wonder why.

Apparently sales of "Breaking the Spell" aren't going well. Inferior statistics?

The notion of deities doesn't pass the smell test.

It shouldn't be too surprising that reality's delicate aroma should, now and again, reach all the way to the pulpit.

Part one.

Disbelief in the pulpit, or how I came to push Coca-cola.

Greetings, my name is Joshua Lowenstein and I was a former Catholic priest although actually a Jew. Actually I am really a homosexual and would like to sell the concept of men being feminine but that has been a secondary career and I expect it to always be so. I expect to have to lie about homosexuality as much as I lie about everything else, except homosexuality will involve lies for a greater length of time.

So I was born a Jew and became a Catholic priest. Why did I do so--become born a Jew, that is? Well I really do not believe in God or Intelligent Design so I just "self-organized" into being a Jew as atheist philosophers such as Dennett would say...It was a "bottom up", strictly biological experience involving no "top down" design by a divinity not least because the doctor had to spank my ass to make me cry and breath. But I can relate entirely sensibly why I became a Catholic priest: Partly because I wanted to escape the persecution Jews are subject to and partly because I actually believed in Jesus Christ. But I never entirely believed the whole time I was a priest. Which is to say never really believed that Jews are all that persecuted these days nor the tenets of Catholicism.

Part two.

But tell me, who really believes in their job? How many people just mark time and make money? Do we not go through the motions on so many things because that is what we are supposed to do and is exactly what pays? Why should I have to believe in the tenets of Catholicism to be a Catholic priest? Do I not perform a service whether I believe or not? And how is this different from selling Coca-cola? Answer: if one begins demanding honesty from one calling one must demand it everywhere. But of course that will not occur. You see, people might have no problem tossing out a priest who disbelieves in what he preaches, but they will not toss out a representative for Coca-cola for not drinking Coke because they believe in Coke so much more than any religion

Part three.

People could not care less about all the lies they tell with this job and that they have--nor do they care if others lie as well--because people believe in these daily and typical jobs and lies. Society has always run to a great extent on lies. Getting to the truth is difficult and it is questionable even if the truth is being gotten at let alone is better for man than believing in falsity. So society in the past to a great degree was dominated by religion, if not totally, but these days, in our advanced modern age, we have other beliefs, which in comparison to traditional religion are more valuable...We must toss out the priest who no longer believes in the tenets of his faith but we must protect so many others in their lies for they are self evidently of more help to man than the religious and their organizations.

So former Jew and and former Catholic priest that I am, I signed on with Coca-cola, the formula which will not rot teeth and has a long and distinguished pedigree, far from the original bottle with its dose of cocaine. And between us I believe in the original formula more than the new ones! I am a Coke fundamentalist! We should buy up the Bolivian and Peruvian crops and make some real Coke! The kids would be drinking it all day and even be quoting Sherlock Holmes and Freud perhaps and looking each other over intensely...

Might even help in promoting homosexuality, and we all know how dear that is to my heart. I just have new beliefs rather than Catholicism let alone Judaism. No circumcision but just condoms. And most important of all, just give people what they want. What sells is good. This certainly is an advance over religion...Of course the atheists, paragons of integrity that they are, have pointed out that priests not believing their own tenets is only part of the problem and that one must not lie in one's capacity at any job. The atheists in short are in the forefront of saying disbelief in the pulpit is only one lie among many services that are performed on (or should I say perpetrated in?) society. I just have difficulty quoting a single atheist on this matter. Perhaps an atheist out there can supply the quotes as they escape me at the moment (both the atheists and the quotes).

Part four.

So I sell Coke. And I have a good plan coming up to sell homosexuality. My slogan will be for the former and latter, do what feels good. Of course this is not original, but people do want to do what feels good. They do not particularly care if what they do is of harm to themselves. In fact they want lies told to themselves lest the truth cut into their enjoyment of life. Tell me, who relishes the truth like a good Coke? No one. But perhaps if we go back to the original formula, packed with true cocaine, people will like the truth, will enjoy pointing it out with grim, numb-nosed intensity. Hell, maybe that is the real reason for the decline of the original Coke formula...too directive of the truth...

So we sell what harms people, what prevents them from the capacity of arriving at the truth. Or at the best, we sell what does not harm, but certainly we are far from selling what enables us to see the truth. The last thing that would sell in society is a truth formula, whether that means what makes one tell the truth as one sees it or the actual truth. Actually the latter is probably an impossibility. But the former, a formula which makes people tell the truth as they see it...that is more feasible. We can sell it as the formula which makes one tell the truth...as one sees it...which of course is not necessarily the truth. Hell, maybe I should open a chocolate factory instead. But that has already been done.

So I sell Coke. Any objections? Of course not. It is Coke, not religion...Hell! There you go!: "It is Coke, not religion". Of course the atheists would come out in droves on this one! I just cornered the atheist market on soft drinks! And we all know man is becoming more atheistic by the day! (whether that is by reason is a different question). In fact perhaps I can sell that love dear to my heart, homosexuality as well...an androgynous personage on the Coke beverage saying "it is Coke, not religion". From there I know it is just one more step to putting the cocaine back in Coke! I just know it!

The hell with the pulpit. I believe in Coke.

Schaum below writing about me:

DanielTheLiar:

"Nazi Germany with its blonde will to power beast!"

Notwithstanding his inability to write sentences that are complete with subjects and predicates -- his great genius again showing itself! -- DanielTheLiar once again lies and distorts history and fact to suit his own delusions. Nazi Germany was ruled by the Nazi hierarchy which was, together with the vast majority of the German population which supported it, mostly christers, and of those, mostly papists.

My reply: If Nazi Germany was not an atheistic phenomenon, did not believe in the biology of race, did not believe in a thousand year reich, and was rather Christian, then I do not want to hear Nietzsche associated with Nazi Germany ever again. But of course the poor guy will, for he has unparalleled insight into what becomes relevant to man without God. We have pure biology, society having to design itself in strictly human terms, a will to power phenomenon. Nietzsche was too intelligent to be considered an advocate of future Naziism, but he sure prophesied problems society would have without the belief in God. And Nazi Germany was one of those problem societies. Nazi Germany was far more atheistic than Christian. Christian foundation, but by the time of Hitler swastika more important than the cross, which was reduced to iron cross symbology, and of course, again, biology of race and thousand year reich. Hardly Christian Nazi Germany. Far more explicable as an atheistic phenomenon.

Great reporting. I would like to pass along my thoughts to those five brave souls who shared their stories; you don't have to worry about losing your community. There are many atheists, agnostics out here who would be happy to welcome you. We too are caring, giving and warm to all in need of friendship and human companionship. Google to find your local or national atheist group. They will probably be happy to have you, sympathize and support you AND maintain your confidentiality. That's what we do.

y: tlusk58

" a rigorous academic study of their faith? I for one find that quite stupid...just like I do this author."
+++++++++++++++++++

A rigorous academic study of faith is as useful as a rigorous study of Astrology or Alchemy. It's nothing to brag about - there are no gods and never were.

I find the author a bit naive. I have an M.Div. from Duke University. I am a person of deep faith who has spent years studying that faith. I would proably fit into the author's list of people.
I learned in divinity school that the average American has two years post high school education- in other words literate and thinking. The average American has a sixth grade understanding of faith. It there any surprise that persons who take their faith seriously, spend three years in graduate study, and think deeply about faith end up with a less than literal understanding of their faith? Of course many clergy have a faith system that is not rigidly orthodox and literal. They also may be the very persons to lead the way to an understanding of faith that is reasoned and devote at the same time.
There is a very deep intellectual strain in Amercian Christianity, which does not lead itself to a more enlighted and therefore more sacred faith. Would you rather place your faith assumptions on a clergy person who has never allowed themselves a rigerous academic study of their faith? I for one find that quite stupid...just like I do this author.

There is a passage in "The Return of Tarzan" that has remained with me for perhaps 40 years since I read it as a boy. In it, the high priestess La is speaking to Tarzan, explaining why she is helping him to escape, unafraid of the horrors within the Chamber of the Dead:

"It is the duty of a high priestess to instruct, to interpret--according to the creed that others, wiser than herself, have laid down; but there is nothing in the creed which says that she must believe. The more one knows of one's religion the less one believes--no one living knows more of mine than I."

Frankly, recent headlines suggest that a good many high-ranking church officials don't believe in any sort of Hell...

What obscurantist nonsense, FRANKLEI.

Either God exists, or God does not exist.

If God does not exist and people just like, are moved by, and live their life according to the stories about God, it remains true that God does not exist.

It's exactly as if someone who likes, is moved by, and lives their live according to the stories in Lord of the Rings or Star Wars. You can get meaning and purpose from something that doesn't exist - but it remains true that it doesn't exist.

My sense is that the writers hold or "can't get over" a rather literal notion of what is "really real," i.e., they seem a bit naive ontologically. They seem to think that unless a literally true, rationalistic proposition can be found to encapsulate and nail down the idea of God we are forced to deny the reality of God and call our intellectual equals who insist on it in spite of their doubts hypocrites. I believe that we are in a waiting time, waiting for a new synthesis -- a new St. Thomas. These guys ain't it, but maybe the 72 year old interviewed is close. Karen Armstrong certainly is. Who will take up their insights and write a book -- a Summa for us. FJM

What a misleading headline: "Skeptical clergy a silent majority?" I wish the article or the linked study had addressed the question, instead of just providing a handful of case studies, from which we might conclude that 100% of (studied) clergy are skeptical.

A serious, statistically sound study should not be too difficult for a grad student to conduct. I'd like to read the conclusions.

But that headline, on this article, was a fraudulent enticement for clicks.

Cassie123:

"I think an article or report on people who call themselves atheists and don't really believe atheism or questions it would be interesting."

Great idea. Why don't you write that article/report? I'm sure it would make fascinating reading. You are aware, I am sure, that there is not such thing as atheism, or atheistic "beliefs"...but I'm certain that, like DanielTheLiar, you will not allow facts to stand in the way of your "original thinking." Seriously, I'd love to read what you have to say about atheists who don't believe in atheism -- since I am an atheist who doesn't believe in atheism.

DX11:

"-So, if I cannot understand something, then it must be true and divine. Let's all worship quantum physics and post-modernist paintings!"

HA! May I have your permission to add this to my list of quotable quotes?

DWGERARD, your arguments are truly astounding:

*What do you call a person who makes love with out being in love? The same thing you call a pastor, priest or preacher who does not believe what he says from the pulpit; a prostitute.*

-So, if you are having a one-night stand, or you don't love your wife anymore but still sleep with her, or if your parents have forced you into an arranged marriage, or if you're raped, then you're a prostitute!

*It is not surprising that so many so called scholars are sceptical of the Gospel: At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Matthew 11:25*

-So, if I cannot understand something, then it must be true and divine. Let's all worship quantum physics and post-modernist paintings!

*Still, I find it curious why such hatred and contempt for Christianity when those following other religions are currently murdering, raping, enslaving and openly calling for the destruction of the US.*

-Ok, now this is an argument: Why are you judging me for being a rapist, if there are others who are murdering?

Very convincing, indeed, DWGERARD

The non-believer who stands before his parishioners and tells them to believe……..is like the Toyota executive who states "trust me, I'm an engineer".... "all Toyotas are completely safe!"

I think an article or report on people who call themselves atheists and don't really believe atheism or questions it would be interesting. Or maybe a report on those in the scientific community who follow along with evolution even thought they don't really think it is possible just to attain tenure would be a good read. The point is, every religion or belief system or theory has people who don't really believe it and continue to pretend for various reasons (paycheck, tenure, impress peers...etc.). Yes...even atheism. So, why are we so surprised? My thinking is that everyone should just be honest about what they believe. Doubt...I can understand doubting to an extent. Continually questioning your beliefs (both religious and non-religious) is a good practice. The Bible does not promote blind faith. If you don't question, you can't possibly truly understand what you believe. There is a difference between questioning and complete disbelief. Disbelieving but continuing to pretend is dishonest - regardless of the religion or viewpoint.

"Take a look at the Eucharistic miracles. There's at least one case in which the priest did not believe was presiding over Mass. Upon consecration not only did the essence change its appearance did as well. It has the substance of flesh with blood. To this day, the host is retained. It's taken out every few decades to use the latest scientific discovers and tools to prove or disprove its new appearance."

And the scientific references to support this Eucharistic "miracle" can be found where???????????????????? (finally the DNA of a god????)

Take a look at the Eucharistic miracles. There's at least one case in which the priest did not believe was presiding over Mass. Upon consecration not only did the essence change its appearance did as well. It has the substance of flesh with blood. To this day, the host is retained. It's taken out every few decades to use the latest scientific discovers and tools to prove or disprove its new appearance.

Consider the paedophile priests who are again making headlines in the British press. My argument is that these priests know very well that there is no God watching over them. They know very well that it is all nonsense - that gods do not exist, that there is no heaven and no hell, that it's all made up.
Would a believing priest ruin his chances of pleasing his creator and of having an eternal life in heaven by diddling little boys and girls? That would be an error of gigantic theological proportians. But as there is no god, and no heaven and no hell to suffer in - then the only witnesses to clerical abuse are the children.

This is fabulous, Dan. Your report, making these interviews public, is providing a great service to humanity and to our planet. Thank you!

I've just started working on a piece for Shermer tentatively titled, "The New Atheists as God's Prophets". I'm sure I'll reference your report.

(Those of you who are commenting, PLEASE take time to actually READ THIS REPORT. Otherwise, your comments have little, if any, integrity.)

As you know, I myself am neither a theist nor an atheist; I'm an transtheist, an emergentist -- a religious naturalist. The concepts of theism and atheism came into use long before we had an evidential understanding of how the world, in fact, came into being, and before we learned that the Universe itself is creative. Given what we now know about big history, the 14-billion-year Epic of Evolution, I don't find the theist-atheist dichotomy particularly useful. Both presuppose a trivial, unnatural God and a Cosmos that is not itself divinely creative and destructive.

Here's my credo...

Reality is my God and integrity is my religion. By this, I mean that what is real is my ultimate commitment and being in right relationship with reality, and assisting humanity in this process, is my calling and deepest inspiration.

I suspect that you and many other atheists would align with this sentiment, which is why I applaud your work and count you as modern-day "prophets" -- i.e., those who speak unflinchingly on behalf of reality.

Thank you for all you're doing to help religions (and we religious people) to evolve. Thanks for helping us let go of superstitious beliefs that divide us as species and threaten our world. And thanks for playing your part in offering humanity a deeply meaningful and inspiring worldview that can unite us across ethnic, religious, and political divides—one based on evidence and reason.

Keep up the great work!

~ Michael Dowd, author of "Thank God for Evolution: How the Marriage of Science and Religion Will Transform Your Life and Our World", which has been endorsed by 6 Nobel laureates and other science luminaries, including noted skeptics, and by religious leaders across the spectrum.

This is fablous, Dan. Your report, making these interviews public, is providing a great service to humanity and to our planet. Thank you!

I've just started working on a piece for Shermer tentatively titled, "The New Atheists as God's Prophets". I'm sure I'll reference your report.

(Those of you who are commenting, please take the time to actually READ THIS REPORT. Otherwise, your comments have little, if any, integrity.)

I myself am neither a theist, nor an atheist. I'm an transtheist, an emergentist—a religious naturalist.  The concepts of theism and atheism came into use long before we had an evidential understanding of how the world, in fact, came into being, and before we learned that the Universe itself is creative.  Given what we now know about big history, the 14-billion-year Epic of Evolution, I no longer find the theist-atheist dichotomy useful. Both presuppose a trivial, unnatural God and a Cosmos that is not itself divinely creative and destructive.  

Here's my credo in a nutshell...

Reality is my God and integrity is my religion.  By this, I mean that what is real is my ultimate commitment and being in right relationship with reality, and assisting humanity in this process, is my calling and deepest inspiration.

I suspect that you and most of the New Atheists would align with this sentiment.

Thank you for all you're doing to help religions (and we religious people) to evolve. Thanks for helping us let go of superstitious beliefs that divide us and threaten our world. And thanks for playing your part in offering humanity a deeply meaningful and inspiring worldview that can unite us across ethnic, religious, and political divides—one based on evidence and reason.

Keep up the great work!

~ Michael Dowd, author of "Thank God for Evolution: How the Marriage of Science and Religion Will Transform Your Life and Our World", which has been endorsed by 6 Nobel laureates and other science luminaries, including noted skeptics, and by religious leaders across the spectrum.

DanielTheLiar:

"Nazi Germany with its blonde will to power beast!"

Notwithstanding his inability to write sentences that are complete with subjects and predicates -- his great genius again showing itself! -- DanielTheLiar once again lies and distorts history and fact to suit his own delusions. Nazi Germany was ruled by the Nazi hierarchy which was, together with the vast majority of the German population which supported it, mostly christers, and of those, mostly papists.

What do you call a person who makes love with out being in love? The same thing you call a pastor, priest or preacher who does not believe what he says from the pulpit; a prostitute.

It is not surprising that so many so called scholars are sceptical of the Gospel:

At that time Jesus said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children. Matthew 11:25

Still, I find it curious why such hatred and contempt for Christianity when those following other religions are currently murdering, raping, enslaving and openly calling for the destruction of the US. I guess it's easier and less mentally challenging to attack a submissive opponent than one that is perfectly willing to fight back with IED's and suicide bombers.

Of course there are questions in the minds of many of the clergy - they wouldn't be human if they didn't question. After all, we are supposed to take the Bible literally but who can follow the Old Testament rules? I don't think many would go along with the idea that slavery is okay, that you should burn an ox, that you should kill your neighbor if he doesn't go to church on Sunday, that you should play football wearing gloves because pigskin is unclean and more.

Even the New Testament raises questions to any intelligent human being. Do we turn the other cheek or do we fight for the rights of those oppressed? Do we run the money-changers (Wall Street) out of the temple or do we allow them to fleece our people?

As an "equal-opportunity heathen" I volunteer for two religious charitable groups, but don't believe 100% in either philosophy. I volunteer because I want to help those in need, not because I am a true believer or member of a religion.

Trusting those who think they have God on speed-dial is not my way. And anyone who does not question is too lazy or ignorant to be a leader.

'Each of us is imperfect and fallible, but the Faith as proclaimed by the Magisterium is not. Please join us on our pilgrimage to the heavenly Jerusalem.'
_____________

Daniel12 will be joining you directly....and do let us hear back from you!

Persiflage:

"Apparently what America needs more is the muddled, whining histrionics of Daniel12 - but then again, maybe not."

Such a pity that DanielTheLiar is unable to find a publisher for his "essays". I wonder why that is? His genius (we know he is one; he has repeatedly told us so) should be shared with the world.

The confusion that is "Protestantism" is a main cause of the "ordained" clergy's dryness of faith. Come home to the Catholic Church, where the truth in full resides. Each of us is imperfect and fallible, but the Faith as proclaimed by the Magisterium is not. Please join us on our pilgrimage to the heavenly Jerusalem.

'Dennett one of the most prominent voices in American philosophy? What does that tell us about American philosophy?'
_________

Apparently what America needs more is the muddled, whining histrionics of Daniel12 - but then again, maybe not.

Atheists in the USA that I know don't generally recommend that atheism replace religion - they do recommend that folks take a closer look at the mythical and factitious basis for what they're taking as literal reality. This is almost a sacred duty with thoughtful atheists that have compassion for their fellow man!

Much of religion is complete nonsense and educated atheists feel compelled to point this out, knowing that a conversion to atheism is only a remote possibility for the bulk of diehard religionists - but it does happen.

If the God delusion works for D12 and his followers, who are we to complain??

This is a struggle with perceptions of what is unseen. I can understand their struggle, but can't relate to their compulsion to share what they believe with others.

I'm somewhat devout, but I view this as more my business than others. I don't really need their participation in, or approval of my religion. It's nice to have others believe as I do, but I prefer my religion to be apart from my secular life.

To some extent, if they aren't questioning themselves they aren't doing the job they want to be doing. I think it's easy to lose sight of that part. All religions grow stronger the more they accumulate truth, and finding it isn't easy, or always what one would expect.

What the Jesus Seminar and other contemporary historical Jesus (e.g. Professor Borg), OT (e.g Rabbi Wolpe) and NT (Professor Fredriksen) exegetes have concluded:

See:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

america is fadeing theologicaly as well as ideologicaly,both think tanks are primitive and backward.

the job of making humanity not only need human philosophy but also need divine revelation to guide and judge,
.,america is way backward in both ,
double failure indeed.

materalistic advance is not going to stay so long,
what shall last is the soldnees of the religion and refination of thought.

america still in the primitive( hole )of does god exist??? and those who belive in the existance of god are not sure is he jesus or marry or the trinity or the incarnation???? sunday morning is the mother day of the religion while the rest of the week is totaly human secularism?

the american theology and ideology is tribal and ununiversal.

Dennett below:

"Here are some questions that have haunted me for years. How many preachers actually believe what they say from the pulpit? We know that every year some clergy abandon their calling, no longer able to execute their duties with conviction. This can never be a decision taken lightly, and many of them labored on for years before taking the leap. Are they the tip of an iceberg? Is there a problem of deep hypocrisy separating many pastors from their flocks? What is it like to be a non-believing preacher? How do they reconcile their private skepticism with the obligations of their position? And how did they get into their predicament?"

Dennett below:

"Our report tells the different--and moving--stories of five good people who find themselves caught in a trap that only someone intent on doing good could fall into, a trap that nobody invented but that subtly and ingeniously blocks the exits."

Oh, the sadness of religion! The self evident trap! And if one only breaks the spell all will be happiness and light! No need to fear that clergy might want to take their lives or at least find life without God worse than belief, but just fear that they might waste their lives in the trap of religion!

And atheism is self evidently better for man than religion! Never mind that atheism is new to man and religion the age old structure of society, virtually synonymous with what we mean by culture! Never mind the very theory of evolution which atheists like to toss around so boldly asks at the least if religion was and still is useful, indeed necessary for man!

Never mind that every single atheist project for a society without God has been an economic and human rights disaster! The Soviet Union with its new man! Nazi Germany with its blonde will to power beast!

Dennett one of the most prominent voices in American philosophy? What does that tell us about American philosophy?

75% of what passes as Christianity in America is best described as cultural habit. Frustrated do gooders, well intentioned religious activists, TV preachers and their victims fill that bill. There is however a group of us that have actually had life changing experience with the Risen Christ. We of this minority are educated, readers, and think clearly about our surroundings. Redemption, justification, reconciliation, regeneration, and a sure hope about the future are together an anchor to the soul in these troublesome days. It's either that or the arrogant bitterness and fear of the likes of Hitchens and Dawkins. There is no middle ground!

"Help us out here good American philosophers in our midst! At least help me. So far as I can tell the atheists and believers have all the answers. They just disagree on the questions among other things...."
POSTED BY: DANIEL12 | MARCH 17, 2010 1:47 AM

DanielTheLiar is, of course, non compos mentis. We are trying to find someone who can help him.

It does not come as a surprise to me that there are pastors who are not believers. Even a cursory reading of the scripture is so offensive to ones sense of decency and fairness. It does not matter which religious scriptures they are. No wonder the clerics are going to definitely doubt all this fairy tale stories. I personally do not see how anyone can find any semblance of ethics and morality in the scriptures. Take for instance the story of Abraham, he is considered the father of Judaism, Christianity & Islam and revered as a pious prophet by nearly 3 billion people is beyond belief, to me. This is the person, who I consider as a totally fictional, according to the scripture lived for 150 years or so, at age 80+ presents his wife (albeit she was also his niece) as his sister twice when he was sojourning in foreign lands. Not only that he also gives her away to the Pharaoh, to be his wife. All this because, he fears for his life in the barbarian foreign lands, where he was seeking refuge. According to the scripture the Pharaoh himself puts it together apparently due to the pestilence the Abrahamic god spreads in Egypt. Look at the atrocity, Abraham passes of his wife to the king's harem, as he fears his life and the people of Egypt get punished, whereas Abraham gets huge dowry for giving away so called sister to the harem. Does anyone think that there is any justice or fairness in this. Abraham himself goes unscathed, according to the scripture. How does anyone rationalize this. In the end it is the Pharaoh who realizes it and for the sake of his people corrects the error that he was duped into by Abraham and exiles him & his wife. As if once was not enough he repeats this again with Abimelech, with similar results. Then this pious "Pond Scum" goes on to bed his slave girl, gifted to him by the Pharaoh, to have a son. Then proceeds to disown both the mother and the child when his wife gives him a child. Which of the noble pastors would be so kind towards John Edwards, I would like to know. Then this father of the religions goes on and is willing to sacrifice his own child. This is touted as his supreme faith in his god. This same scoundrel could not muster the same faith in his god when he felt his life would be in danger, but when it came to his son he seemed to have gained this extreme faith in his god. In face of such vile stories it is no surprise that folks profess unbelief, albeit in private. I want to hear from the theist who can attempt to rationalize their reverence to Abraham, in light of the above. And to top it all of, this fellow after his wife of how ever many years passes away, he had to have another woman to keep his bed warm in the night - how sick is that.

It is apparent that the charlatans and hucksters of the evangelical world, the Bakers, Hinn, Robertson and Swaggert are in it as a big bucks business. But local preachers of the super chuches can pull down big bucks also. Remember since they don't pay taxes and for the most part don't get audited, these can be cash cows of a large order. I would be very suprised if ANY of these con artist believe a word of the bible. They certainly don't practise it.

Not that I recommend practising religion.

"This very thing must be happening to people in droves"?? Really? Because 5 protestant preachers/learders spoke of their unbelief? This report is interesting, but I wouldn't generalize the findings too much to say that most of the church leaders feel this way.

As a Christian, who sits each Sunday under the teachings of a pastor , I would want my pastor to step down from his position if he were to no longer believe in what he is teaching. I understand that it would be hard. The loss of a paycheck, even friends etc. I understand that some people decide that Christianity is not for them, and I respect that decision. The church congregation should be respectful of what the person believes (although they will be undoubtedly surprised/saddened). However, from the perspective of someone sitting in the pew, I don't want to be under the teaching of someone who doesn't believe what they are telling me. How can you really teach what you don't believe as truth? How can you sleep at night?

Excellent treatment of a seldom asked question. We have to conclude that changing one's world is a very difficult undertaking - even a once-familiar and cherished world based on beliefs that no longer ring true.

This very thing must be happening to people in droves. Preachers and congregations alike are no doubt pondering their next move - the move beyond religious faith, that is.

For men and women of the cloth, the painful sense of loneliness and loss must be particularly acute. How does one forge a new profession and a different way of life after religion?? Keeping up pretenses can only last so long.......

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/Non-Believing-Clergy.pdf

Spidermean2 is now SPIDERNEUTERED!

Given three simple algebra problems to solve,Spiderneutered proved he has no understanding of mathematics by his inability to solve any of the problems until I gave him the formulas to use. He claimed as unsolvable a problem which thread-member Arminius had no problem in solving. Then we discovered that Spiderneutered is not an engineer (what a surprise that was!) but a student! DanielInTheLionsDen then exposed Spiderneutered’s lack of even rudimentary knowledge of Euler; he further showed that Spiderneutered copied, and ALTERED, to suit his own purposes, a definition from Wikipidia. Thread-member Barferio exposed Spiderneutered's confusion of sexual reproduction with self-replication, and also repeatedly asked Spiderneutered questions about meiosis, which of course Spiderneutered could not answer because he knows even less about science than he does about math. Spiderneutered highlighted his ignorance of physics by confusing mass with energy – to him, such concepts as ‘acceleration’ and ‘speed of light squared’ are not worth consideration! Additionally, Spiderneutered further illustrated his incompetence in mathematics with the astonishingly stupid claim that "x=x+1" doesn't work in math! And of course there are the lingering questions about his relationship with his nephew...

The combined efforts of members of The Spirited Atheist blog have definitively discredited Spiderneutered as the lying, ignorant, and incompetent fraud we have long known him to be.

One of my problems with churches in general is that while they do give you a nice little community where you can meet new people and become part of a network of clubs, charities, and travel groups, you get it at a cost. Its easy to think that they are all your friends, but in reality they are only your friend because of your common religion. Your co-coreligionists are perfectly happy visit you when sick, care for you when your depressed, but when you leave the church, I'm sure all that will disappear. My parents recently left the ELCA for a Methodist church because the ELCA's slightly progressive attitude towards gays aggravated them (Being pro-gay rights myself, this was a whole barrel of awkwardness to me). I imagine they'll keep up with some of their old friends, but I they lose the lion share in the exchange. They get fresh ones at the Methodist church, of course, but its the sort of situation that grates on my notion of friendship and community. I'll take my own loose community of friends any day... I won't say that I wouldn't lose friends through change, but at least it won't be because of whether one believes in saints or transubstantiation.

Above and beyond those who pretend to believe in the veracity of various superstitions espoused by themselves from the pulpit, it would be a step in the right direction if they would preach the scholarship which they learn in seminary school as outlined in several books by Dr. Bart D. Ehrman (especially his newest, "Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them)."

It's one thing for people to have doubt about the unknown; but quite another to hide known untruths in order to preserve others' faith.

Dennett below:

"Here are some questions that have haunted me for years."

What other questions do you find haunting? Here is a book title by which we can judge the profundity of both modern atheism and modern philosophy: "Questions that have haunted me for years." A book which will never be written...except by the likes of a true atheist and philosopher.

It is not surprising that there are still a large number of atheists who are living in the closet. There is after all a great deal of social pressure aimed to discourage open disbelief. That pressure is much greater for those who make a living from their god-belief.

Religion is a business. There are people in the world who have trained all their lives to preach the Bible. Not all of those people are forced into a life of celibacy either. Many have families to support. So when one of these people who was raised from near birth to believe and spends their life learning the details of the Bible finally realizes that it is all a sham, they have some real problems to think about and deal with.

You can read the rest of my response to this topic:
http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-8928-Philadelphia-Atheism-Examiner~y2010m3d17-On-Faith-Disbelief-in-the-pulpit

I will be responding to every issue posted in the 'On Faith' section. If you would like to be notified when my new response is up, please subscribe.

Part one.

Breaking the spell of religion? Religion a spell? Who put this spell on man? Is it not true that every single culture known to man began with religion? Atheists are to break the spell and enlighten man, teach us to spell the new word of no God?

Well, then let us proceed with reason. Atheists say there is no God. What does that mean? It can only mean for starters that they hold that there are no such thing as absolutes, such as absolutes of morality, reason and so on. Without God we have ourselves living in pure Heraclitean time. And what does pure Heraclitean time mean other than something that cannot with any certainty progress, lead to things getting better for man? In fact there is no goal for man other than to...what? Make society better if not only no real betterment is assured at all but society has to fail eventually?

Part two.

And what is intelligence if no God and of course the corollary bane of atheists, intelligent design does not exist? How can intelligence be told from what is not intelligent if no absolute of intelligence exists? What truth from falsity when no objective standard can possibly exist? How can one declare a delusion a delusion if no objective standard of intelligence exists? No God and the very project of science, determining truth from falsity, objective existence from pure subjectivity, collapses like a house of...religious believers in an earthquake in Haiti and Chile...Not that I personally give a damn about God, but atheists are hardly paragons of reason.

Part three.

Most scientists will tell you they believe in truth from falsity, the concept of proof, objective existence determinable from the purely subjective. But no belief in God destroys the very ground of absolutes. This means the entire concept of proof is rendered senseless. Saying there is no proof for God is a senseless statement when one's very disbelief has destroyed the possibility of an absolute by which one can speak of proof. Besides, the scientific method has not only never demonstrated the nonexistence of God as many atheists like to hold, it cannot even be taken as a reliable method for much of anything if no God exists because there is no objectivity clearly separable from subjectivity without God.

Part four.

The world of atheism results in a world in which truth/falsity is not the criterion but only what conduces to human survival. The goal becomes pure survival because no objective true from false can ever be arrived at--that is a fool's errand. And actually science demonstrates the truth that survival is the issue not true from false. We have the theory of evolution by natural selection. An animal does what it takes to survive. And when we reflect that every human society has been religious, who are we to say that religion is bad for man? Is disbelief in God really a better survival strategy for man? What proof for such exists?

Amazing how atheists with the very science they so often throw in the faces of the religious cannot grasp the simple concept that by their very reasoning, their very science that the truth or falsity of God is not the issue but whether the belief in him conduces to survival--and in fact God cannot even be spoken of as a lie. How can something be called a lie when all that exists is time and no absolutes whatsoever? A lie is relative in such a case...

And so much more can be said. Not that I am religious. How can I be religious with this intensity of mind demonstrated? I think, I am. Philosophy. Which is more than can be said of some American philosophers. I once read a book by an American philosopher and on virtually every other page he would write in parentheses "stop that crow!" as if what he was saying was controversial, not to mention the allusion to Shakespeare, the upstart crow. I would ask this American philosopher to actually stand for philosophy and not rest on his laurels, which truth to tell are hard to determine how come by...

Part five.

Ahh, but why not entertain myself? Let me see if I understand correctly a line of reasoning here...Intelligent design does not exist and life just "self-organized"...Intelligence which by its very name means conscious self-direction, conscious action taken with respect to what is perceived as problem, "self-organized"? It became what it is out of first not being what it is? But it is because it self-organized into what it is? Nice to know intelligence did not need to be intelligent or at least conscious to become what it is...Kind of makes you wonder why we should be trying to be more reasonable and conscious. Kind of makes you wonder if we should rather become as ignorant as possible because the entire universe and man and his intelligence did not come from any intelligent design but just self-organized...What exactly is the value of intelligence if the entire universe and man and his intelligence just arose without the slightest bit of intelligence behind it? Should we not rather be trying to as unconscious as possible? Maybe revert to blind savagery? Which is not a bad proposition when we reflect that we humans now with our technology can do much more to ourselves than drive ourselves back to savagery...We can just plain wipe ourselves out. Which will not be more tempting the more we lose faith in God?

But maybe the problem exists with my reason--which of course is not my fault as it just self-organized and no doubt needs an atheist to organize it for me with his intelligence which self-organized as well...Not that I expect God to come down and answer my questions...although I hear if I enter a cave the angel Gabriel might appear with some enlightening answers which will not involve conquering people by the sword...no the gun is more useful these days...

Help us out here good American philosophers in our midst! At least help me. So far as I can tell the atheists and believers have all the answers. They just disagree on the questions among other things....

I read every word of your report. I have been there, seen it, lived it. I never got as far into the profession as some of your interviewees, but each of their stories resonated with parts of my journey.

I alternate between feeling grateful for the opportunity to help people move beyond literalism yet still believe with integrity - a gift I think I conveyed to many others yet never found for myself - and feeling remorse for being so intellectually dishonest. I used the same words, the same religious language, but even at my most sincere, I never meant what they assumed I meant when I talked about God, Christ, etc.

I'm glad I got out while I was young. I can't imagine feeling forced to stay because I needed the paycheck or the pension. I'm surprised your ministers didn't express more guilt about that.

While clearly some of the same dynamics are at work, I think a distinction can drawn between the three mainliners and the Baptist & Church of Christ guys. The former have defined-benefit pensions, while the latter probably do not (and may not even have health benefits). The UMC guy is probably the only one with a bishop. I guess my point here is that, even though they share common experiences, their church and denominational contexts are substantially different in some cases.

Very fine work. Your coauthor did a great job with the interviews.

Thank you for doing this important research.

"so that the world can know something more about this phenomenon, which can only grow in importance as more and more religious leaders confront the flood of ideas and information that we in the developed world are swimming in today"

Gutenberg dealt the first critical blow to religion. The internet will be the knock out blow in my opinion. But I guess if I'm going to call the printing press "Gutenberg" I should call the internet "Al Gore." ;)

Keep up the good work, Mr. Dennett.

This has been a problem for a long time: there are many professional theists but few professional atheists.